Liberal Forum

RedheadedStranger » 14 Mar 2024, 9:04 am » wrote: ↑

14 Mar 2024, 9:04 am

She seems like your type for sure.

LOL
 
Did you ever find out what "proof" Carroll had that Trump assaulted her other than her just saying it happened, or no?

You mean, like, having told people about it contemporaneously?

Fingerprints?

RedheadedStranger » 14 Mar 2024, 8:27 am » wrote: ↑

14 Mar 2024, 8:27 am

Here is your "low bar" Rico...

https://youtu.be/zoXZ8Uln-lg?si=aCAdhKjA91IsaXaq

Carroll is certifiably nuts.

And there's another of your sources, Rippy...

R.Suave » 14 Mar 2024, 9:26 am » wrote: ↑

14 Mar 2024, 9:26 am

You mean, like, having told people about it contemporaneously?

Fingerprints?

Hearsay, at best.

Fingerprints?

Do tell...
 
 

R.Suave » 14 Mar 2024, 9:28 am » wrote: ↑

14 Mar 2024, 9:28 am

And there's another of your sources, Rippy...

Yet you can't refute what she is saying.

I accept your concession... again.
 

RedheadedStranger » 14 Mar 2024, 9:30 am » wrote: ↑

14 Mar 2024, 9:30 am

Yet you can't refute what she is saying.

I accept your concession... again.

I didn't bother...

 

RedheadedStranger » 14 Mar 2024, 9:29 am » wrote: ↑

14 Mar 2024, 9:29 am

Hearsay, at best.

Fingerprints?

Do tell...

Please stop presuming you understand "hearsay".

You people are **** idiots.
 

R.Suave » 14 Mar 2024, 9:43 am » wrote: ↑

14 Mar 2024, 9:43 am

I didn't bother...

You can't.

Sorry... you lose again.

Maybe some crazy woman from your past will pop up and claim you sexually assaulted her back in 1988 and sue you for $83 million someday.

If she can produce a "friend" or two to testify that she told them you did it back in 1988, then you're toast.

That's the system you support and believe in, so you couldn't say a word.

 
 

R.Suave » 14 Mar 2024, 9:44 am » wrote: ↑

14 Mar 2024, 9:44 am

Please stop presuming you understand "hearsay".

You people are **** idiots.

hear·say

1. information received from other people that one cannot adequately substantiate; rumor.

 
Idiot

R.Suave » 14 Mar 2024, 9:23 am » wrote: ↑

14 Mar 2024, 9:23 am

I don't get why you presume to explain.

When the ****** Grabber claimed "they let him" grab ******, you idiots insisted it must be so because none of them filed charges...

Now not only did one sue, she prevailed AND the State of NY made amends for its barbarism by changing its laws.

Now you want to insist he's not a rapist.

You must believe the tan is real.

All the blubbering before the part in red is nothing more than you trying to change the subject.

I understand, in the Whiny *** Liberal Dictionary of Trump Terms you have your own definition of many, many words.  However, under the law...he is not a rapist.

Now that you have attempted to change the subject, I can accept your surrender.

Carry on.
 

RedheadedStranger » 14 Mar 2024, 9:49 am » wrote: ↑

14 Mar 2024, 9:49 am

hear·say

1. information received from other people that one cannot adequately substantiate; rumor.

Idiot

QED.

They testified to being told by Carroll..

That is NOT hearsay.


**** idiot.


 

R.Suave » 14 Mar 2024, 12:18 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Mar 2024, 12:18 pm

QED.

They testified to being told by Carroll..

That is NOT hearsay.

**** idiot.

Did she really name her cat "vagina"?
 

BooRadley » 14 Mar 2024, 12:20 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Mar 2024, 12:20 pm

Did she really name her cat "vagina"?

You're Hole.

So what?
 

R.Suave » 14 Mar 2024, 12:18 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Mar 2024, 12:18 pm

QED.

They testified to being told by Carroll..

That is NOT hearsay.

**** idiot.

Without firsthand knowledge it is HEARSAY and is not admissible in a court of law, you goddamn ****,  terminal TDS liberal idiot!!!

Submit bitch carroll to a lie detector and it will prove the bitch is lying.  Bet she would refuse.
 

R.Suave » 14 Mar 2024, 12:30 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Mar 2024, 12:30 pm

You're Hole.

So what?

I guess that's a "yes"

ConsRule » 14 Mar 2024, 10:07 am » wrote: ↑

14 Mar 2024, 10:07 am

All the blubbering before the part in red is nothing more than you trying to change the subject.

I understand, in the Whiny *** Liberal Dictionary of Trump Terms you have your own definition of many, many words.  However, under the law...he is not a rapist.

Now that you have attempted to change the subject, I can accept your surrender.

Carry on.

and I understand that you are clinging to a legal technicality to excuse abhorrent behavior on the part of your clown god.

The jury found that he had sexually abused E. Jean Carroll and the abusive behavior was finger-****.  At the time of the offense, that did not constitute rape in the State of New York which, at that time, required penetration by a penis.  As of January of this year, forcible finger-**** IS rape in New York.

And you think that's a place to make a stand?  "My guy was not technically a rapist then... and really, what's all that wrong with a little finger-****' and ****** grabbin' anyway?  

 

maineman » 14 Mar 2024, 12:42 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Mar 2024, 12:42 pm

and I understand that you are clinging to a legal technicality to excuse abhorrent behavior on the part of your clown god.

The jury found that he had sexually abused E. Jean Carroll and the abusive behavior was finger-****.  At the time of the offense, that did not constitute rape in the State of New York which, at that time, required penetration by a penis.  As of January of this year, forcible finger-**** IS rape in New York.

And you think that's a place to make a stand?  "My guy was not technically a rapist then... and really, what's all that wrong with a little finger-****' and ****** grabbin' anyway?

Actually, it isn't the law yet...will be as of September 1 of this year.

New York expands the legal definition of rape to include many forms of nonconsensual sexual contact | AP News

The current law defines rape as vaginal penetration by a penis. The new law broadens the definition to include nonconsensual anal, oral, and vaginal sexual contact. Highlighting Carroll’s case at a bill signing ceremony in Albany, the Democratic governor said the new definition will make it easier for rape victims to bring cases forward to prosecute perpetrators. The law will apply to sexual assaults committed on or after Sept. 1.

Do you ever pay attention to the news or do you just like making **** up? By the way...it's not my fault you are factually incorrect so often...it's your fault.

 
 

maineman » 14 Mar 2024, 12:42 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Mar 2024, 12:42 pm

and I understand that you are clinging to a legal technicality to excuse abhorrent behavior on the part of your clown god.

The jury found that he had sexually abused E. Jean Carroll and the abusive behavior was finger-****.  At the time of the offense, that did not constitute rape in the State of New York which, at that time, required penetration by a penis.  As of January of this year, forcible finger-**** IS rape in New York.

And you think that's a place to make a stand?  "My guy was not technically a rapist then... and really, what's all that wrong with a little finger-****' and ****** grabbin' anyway?

And she waited 30 years?

Buffalo » 14 Mar 2024, 12:35 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Mar 2024, 12:35 pm

Without firsthand knowledge it is HEARSAY and is not admissible in a court of law, you goddamn ****,  terminal TDS liberal idiot!!!

Submit bitch carroll to a lie detector and it will prove the bitch is lying.  Bet she would refuse.

Fondler, you **** idiot.

She was asked to testify to having had the conversation with Carroll.

You people are so **** dim.
 

BooRadley » 14 Mar 2024, 12:49 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Mar 2024, 12:49 pm

And she waited 30 years?

No, Hole....inform yourself, cretin.

R.Suave » 14 Mar 2024, 12:49 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Mar 2024, 12:49 pm

Fondler, you **** idiot.

She was asked to testify to having had the conversation with Carroll.

You people are so **** dim.

Of course she was asked to testify.  Who asked her?  Have them all take lie detector tests and prove they are not lying!!!